List lodgement pre-draft complete - Tanner Smith Delisted

[Dockernut]

Meh.

 

[clogged]

He may eventually come good if taken through the rookie draft, but that's further worries about the competency of the recruiters. 2010 draft burned, 2012 near enough to it.

 

[Moo]

He may eventually come good if taken through the rookie draft, but that's further worries about the competency of the recruiters. 2010 draft burned, 2012 near enough to it.

I'd like to disagree with this post....sadly I cannot.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Why? So he can sit behind, Lake, Frawley, Gibson, Sphanger and Shoenmakers for a spot in the 22. Would be a complete waste of time for your club. Sign him up, will be like playing with a list a player short.

And two years ago you would've said "Why? So Spangher can sit behind Lake, Frawley, Gibson, and Schoenmakers." The Hawks'll do better than any other club at developing borderline players.

As it stands, Smith has done nothing, has barely excited the easily excitable hyperbole crew on here, is constantly injured, and has been demoted to the rookie list (a sign of development at most, a sign of the beginning of the end in all likelihood).

 

[Silent Alarm]

He may eventually come good if taken through the rookie draft, but that's further worries about the competency of the recruiters. 2010 draft burned, 2012 near enough to it.

But Fyfe five years ago!!!!!!!! Neale and Sutcliffe!!!!

 

[JunglistPosse]

I was told 2 things from 2 guys who I have a bit of time for -


(2) WC have shown serious interest in Cockatoo

Which is apt as they have had a Dick or two on their list for many years.

 

[purplerunsdeep]

And two years ago you would've said "Why? So Spangher can sit behind Lake, Frawley, Gibson, and Schoenmakers." The Hawks'll do better than any other club at developing borderline players.

As it stands, Smith has done nothing, has barely excited the easily excitable hyperbole crew on here, is constantly injured, and has been demoted to the rookie list (a sign of development at most, a sign of the beginning of the end in all likelihood).

pretty much hit the nail on the head

there is a gap between what we talk about hoping that will happen vs reality of the situation

Id love to see him be re-rookied and for him to prove us wrong but.....

 

[clogged]

But Fyfe five years ago!!!!!!!! Neale and Sutcliffe!!!!

2010-2012 there's a hit rate of less than 50% through the national draft. Six gone, five still remaining. Not the best rate of success so soon after the players' recruitment.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Neale'll turn out a great little rover and Sutcliffe's okay, but even the latter has been overrated a lot on here. If he was 28 people would be calling him to be dropped. I don't care what anyone says, Bond should've been cleared out when Lyon was appointed. He hasn't been held accountable for some of the choices made. Could you imagine how grim Freo'd look without Fyfe? Not one for hypotheticals but jesus, it'd be a depressing outlook for the team.

 

[PintofPale]

2010-2012 there's a hit rate of less than 50% through the national draft. Six gone, five still remaining. Not the best rate of success so soon after the players' recruitment.

But what is a successful draft? One from which the draftees get a game? ...doesn't that mean others aren't getting a game? So their draft was crap???

Seriously, we've got to name 22 guys each week.

 

[Silent Alarm]

But what is a successful draft? One from which the draftees get a game? ...doesn't that mean others aren't getting a game? So their draft was crap???

Seriously, we've got to name 22 guys each week.

What are you trying to argue?

Are you trying to imply not getting a game is a decent return? Or getting a game is no better than not playing?

A good draft is to get a good player who has a purpose and need in the team and who'll be serviceable at the least. Someone like Sutcliffe should be seen as a 'decent' draft pick while someone like Fyfe is obviously the Albany Highway ahead. The issue I have is that people see our average, standard pick-ups as revolutionary and somehow crafty gets.

I really think the on-field success of the side is deflecting from things like the poor drafting record. And don't use the excuse of success as a natural hinderer of development... the Hawks' fit in Litherland and Duryea and Port are filled to the brim with not only Jarmen Impeys, Jake Neades, Chad Wingard, Ollie Wines et al, but they've done very well in getting guys like Jay Schulz to be hearts and souls of their forward line (which in turn, makes average players be able to do alright – less pressure, less attention, more suitable roles).

 

[Moo]

But what is a successful draft? One from which the draftees get a game? ...doesn't that mean others aren't getting a game? So their draft was crap???

Seriously, we've got to name 22 guys each week.

If guys are getting delisted 2-3 seasons after being drafted, someone's not doing their job.

 

[Noobrifle]

Do you think this shows Freo have a lack of confidence in Smith's body holding up (or his fitness levels being AFL standard due to his injury plagued year)?

As it stands, we have a real lack of depth in both KPP Forwards and Defenders. We've delisted 3 talls this off-season, and only have a total of 3 KPP talls (excluding rucks) and 5 KPP backmen (of which we play 3 a game). Add to this the fact that Mcpharlin and Pavlich have had injury concerns and are unlikely to be fit for every game of the season.

We really need to draft at least one mature tall to help fill this void. Grimley is the obvious choice here and seems to be a much better option than Hannath. We could also look at rookie listing an ready to go tall, but it appears Smith will fill this slot.

It also is a pretty good indicator that we expect to pick up at least 1-2 talls in the draft. The risk here is that other teams draft tall early, which means we are forced to either draft a lesser player early or we choose the best available, end up drafting all midfielders and then have a real lack of talls on our list.

In regards to recent drafting "blunders" it is really hard to separate what causes a draft pick to fail, and indeed whether the problem was in the draft selection, player development or fitness/injury management. I feel like we often attack the draft choice itself and ignore the fact we failed to develop the player properly. In many ways I feel like our player development is stalling: most of our younger players only improved incrementally in 2014, while many of our 3-6 year players seemed to stall or stagnate (see Mayne, Suban, Deboer, C Pearce, Clarke, Spurr, Hannath).

I also get the sense that playing for Peel has been a large negative on a players development. Neale and Sutcliffe have become best 22 after playing at Swan Districts and East Fremantle respectively. Sheridan, Crozier, Menegola, C Pearce, Moller, Smith, Hannath etc have played the majority of their recent games at Peel and IMO have suffered as a result.

In terms of drafting - we have clearly targeted first rounders with a higher risk/reward ratio. I think this has been due to three reasons:
1. Our first round pick was essentially a second rounder due to compromised drafts
2. Not being in desperate need to have draftees play in their first year
3. Over confidence in our player development.

Simpson, Pitt and Crozier all seemed to fit that high risk/reward mould, and all were rated pre draft as first rounders. I think the issue here was more development that recruiting. We've also messed up the fitness/injury management of Forster (hip surgery he never seemed to get over), Michie (ignoring his foot complaints) and now it seem Smith.

In terms of drafting and list management I find the selection of Sheridan more baffling, given his pre-draft rating, lack of football smarts and lack of standout attributes (unless we were sucked in by the endurance combine results). Hannath is another selection I have an issue with, particularly keeping him on the list for this long. The fact that we handed Hannath a 2 year deal worries me more about our list management than some of our recent draft selections. Especially given his poor WAFL form and physical limitations. I imagine we would have delisted him ahead of Smith if he wasn't contracted for multiple years.

 

[Swan Districts Kid]

I think the theory from posters about dropping Tanner Smith for Sam Grimley carries some weight.

Don't know if someone already made the point, but Grimley still had another year to go on his contract.
So Grimley must have consented to the delisting - why would you do that? Maybe because another club where you might get more opportunity has said that they will pick you up as a delisted free agent?
The Hawks have obviously tried to shop him around otherwise they would have delisted him earlier. Sounds like someone has said we'd like to take Sam but only for free (& we all know how much Freo loves a free agent).

The Hawks afl article about delisting Grimley quotes the Hawks list manager as having agreed to rookie him "if he is not selected by another team". This almost suggests that it's considered quite possible.

Also, I think there was an article out after the end of season, saying Grimley wanted to be traded out for more opportunities.

Also, why suddenly decide to drop the injury prone Tanner Smith at this late point of proceedings? Maybe because grimley was dropped a day or two before him.

Maybe it's all coincidence, or another club wants him, but sounds plausible we might see him in purple.

 

[jedi mind tricks]

I think the theory from posters about dropping Tanner Smith for Sam Grimley carries some weight.

Don't know if someone already made the point, but Grimley still had another year to go on his contract.
So Grimley must have consented to the delisting - why would you do that? Maybe because another club where you might get more opportunity has said that they will pick you up as a delisted free agent?
The Hawks have obviously tried to shop him around otherwise they would have delisted him earlier. Sounds like someone has said we'd like to take Sam but only for free (& we all know how much Freo loves a free agent).

The Hawks afl article about delisting Grimley quotes the Hawks list manager as having agreed to rookie him "if he is not selected by another team". This almost suggests that it's considered quite possible.

Also, I think there was an article out after the end of season, saying Grimley wanted to be traded out for more opportunities.

Also, why suddenly decide to drop the injury prone Tanner Smith at this late point of proceedings? Maybe because grimley was dropped a day or two before him.

Maybe it's all coincidence, or another club wants him, but sounds plausible we might see him in purple.

Very plausible.

He would also come very cheap at pick 72. I really hope Tanner gets picked by Freo in the rookie draft and builds himself up to reach AFL for us in the near future.

 

[mike91]

He may eventually come good if taken through the rookie draft, but that's further worries about the competency of the recruiters. 2010 draft burned, 2012 near enough to it.

Shizza that's bad

 

[jedi mind tricks]

And two years ago you would've said "Why? So Spangher can sit behind Lake, Frawley, Gibson, and Schoenmakers." The Hawks'll do better than any other club at developing borderline players.

As it stands, Smith has done nothing, has barely excited the easily excitable hyperbole crew on here, is constantly injured, and has been demoted to the rookie list (a sign of development at most, a sign of the beginning of the end in all likelihood).

It appears that some drafts Freo gets most if the pics right and other drafts the exact opposite. Not sure why this happens.

I also have my doubts on Grey from the same draft of Tanner and Simpson having seen him play for Peel a number of times this season. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[Alfonz]

Why? Keep a guy that doesn't want to be at the club versus a guy that has worked hard yet suffered injury problems? WTF..

It's pretty simple why. For starters, Simpson is far more talented than Smith. And it's nonsense to think he didn't want to be at the club, just because he couldn't meet some foreign "act like people you are nothing like" protocols. Simpson clearly wanted to just play footy for Freo, but hard for him to do so under the regimented environment that he found himself in.

 

[Schauermann]

2010-2012 there's a hit rate of less than 50% through the national draft. Six gone, five still remaining. Not the best rate of success so soon after the players' recruitment.

Not sure many clubs have a better hit rate. Around 50:50 sounds not to bad to me...

 

[Frank J Moose]

Very plausible.

He would also come very cheap at pick 72. I really hope Tanner gets picked by Freo in the rookie draft and builds himself up to reach AFL for us in the near future.

Grimley would come as a delisted FA and not through the draft. I read somewhere that Freo had been talking to Mitch Brown (Geelong one) To convince a DFA to move would take a spot on the main list. Nine players are being moved to the rookie list this season. It seems to much more of a list management tool with clubs trying to open up list spots to sign free agents.

 

[Alfonz]

The 2012 draft also looks to be fairly woeful, so I'd keep that in mind when judging our performance there. Outside the top 10, might be some battlers that carve a 100-150 game career at a weak club, but that's about it.

Footywire has a neat feature where you can filter drafts by club, then click through each year. Let's look at the best 22 for Port/Freo/Hawks/Syd. Used the last game for all, except for Freo used something of a "general consensus" side.


.......... P / F / H / S
2013 - 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
2012 - 1 / 1 / 0 / 2
2011 - 1 / 4 / 1 / 1
2010 - 2 / 0 / 3 / 1
2009 - 2 / 2 / 2 / 3
2008 - 3 / 4 / 2 / 2
2007 - 1 / 1 / 1 / 1
2006 - 3 / 0 / 1 / 1
2005 - 1 / 1 / 1 / 1
2004 - 0 / 0 / 2 / 1
2003 - 0 / 3 / 0 / 0
2002 - 0 / 1 / 0 / 2
2001 - 0 / 1 / 2 / 0
2000 (and before) - 1 / 1 / 0 / 1
Trades (incl. PSD like Tippett, Dawson; also Mzungu, Neade) - 7 / 3 / 7 / 6


Similar patterns for most sides. You can realistically hope to draft 1-2 good players per year, maybe 3-4 in the odd draft. There will be a few more depth players sprinkled around, say 1-2 every few years. Plus trades. Add that up over say 10-15 years, snaring a few bargains like Fyfe/Barlow/Walters, then you can arrive at a quality side. Our recruiting strike rate seems in line with most good sides.

I reckon recruiters are overrated as a collective. To me it isn't much different to the average mug trying to hit a triple 20 on a dartboard ... you have reasonable hand/eye co-ordination and have some idea of how to throw and get in the general vicinity. Hit a few 20s, hit some 1s, hit some 5s. Every now and then make a 60. Throw a few left handed at the end of the game, and it could go anywhere.

 

[TallyHawk]

Why? So he can sit behind, Lake, Frawley, Gibson, Sphanger and Shoenmakers for a spot in the 22. Would be a complete waste of time for your club. Sign him up, will be like playing with a list a player short.

He would be given time at Hawks to get his body right. Lake is getting on and didn't play too many games, Gibbo is better suited to the 3rd tall role, Shoe was shopped around and could end up being a forward, and Spangher is a battler who is more of a swingman than a quality kpd. Tanner Smith would compliment our next gen defence of Frawley, Brand and Heatherly.

 

[clogged]

Not sure many clubs have a better hit rate. Around 50:50 sounds not to bad to me...

Over what time frame? More than half of the players Freo have drafted through the ND have not been retained beyond 2-3 years of their drafting. I can't think of too many clubs with a poorer strike rate, aside from Melbourne.

 

[Patty_Moz]

I also have my doubts on Grey from the same draft of Tanner and Simpson having seen him play for Peel a number of times this season. Hope I'm wrong.

Grey was from '13 draft the yr after Tanner/ Simpson but I have my concerns as well as he already has stress fractures in his back. But do you mean ability?

Also Smith is recognised as injury prone around here but Alex Pearce missed more games due to injury than Smith did in his 1st year so I'm not yet convinced about Pearces durability.

 

[Schauermann]

Over what time frame? More than half of the players Freo have drafted through the ND have not been retained beyond 2-3 years of their drafting. I can't think of too many clubs with a poorer strike rate, aside from Melbourne.

Over any timeframe. Really have to looks at stats, but quite a few player are gone without having a huge impact. Also depends a bit on what you consider a strike...